Clinton Democracy

Let me see. How many times in the past three weeks have Hillary Clinton's supporters threatened to use the hefty dollar sign they wield as a way to influence the outcome of this -- what we would like to believe is a -- democratic -- nomination process?

That I know of, three times... right? Once in Florida -- remember, the guy, Paul Cejas, a Miami businessman who wanted the $28,000 he donated to the DNC in 2007 back because as he so angrily declared in the New York Times, "If you're not going to count my vote, I'm not going to give you my money," and the guy, Christopher Korge, the Florida real estate developer who raised in or around $140,000 for the DNC last year, and who, in a polite but, at the same time, menacing way, told the New York Times that, "If we do not resolve this issue, I think it's safe to say there will be a request for a return of $140,000." (Strangely enough, neither made their objections known back in late 2007, early 2008). Then there was Michigan. You remember, of course, the letter signed by the Governor of Pennsylvania, Ed Rendell and the Governor of New Jersey, Jon Corzine, which they wrote to the Governor of Michigan, Jennifer Granholm, (Clinton supporters all), in which they said that they had "taken the liberty of soliciting guarantors" to fund a Michigan revote, which I guess, on the face of it, sounds absolutely wonderful and generous until you read the list of guarantors and find that they are all -- every single one of them -- Clinton supporters and financial backers. I don't know the answer to this question with any certainty but I'm assuming that they didn't approach any Obama supporters for funds. I could be wrong on this of course. (If I am, please, let me know.)

And now we have Wednesday's private letter (intercepted by, as I understand it, the great Greg Sargent over at Talking Points Memo), to the honorable (I love that word, "honorable"), Madam Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, in which twenty Hillary Fundraisers, who between them, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, have donated in or around $24 million to the Democratic Party over the past decade, imply that they would withhold their support if Nancy Pelosi doesn't as they put it, "clarify" her position on superdelegates.

"We have been," they write, "strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August. We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the Party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters."

Good lord, I've never read a letter from the mob, but I imagine one could conceivably look something like this. Thinly veiled threat delivered in polite but menacing terms. ("Do as we say lady or ... ).

The troubling thing here is that these are the efforts we know about. What about the ones of which we have no clue? What else are the Clintons up to? These three attempts to take democracy out of the democratic party are merely forewarnings of the type of pressure Clinton supporters with deep pockets would put on superdelegates in the run up to the August convention. More and more I dread the back rooms of Washington and the deals that could be done there.

Comments

[mommadona]

I just returned from my 'volunteering' at the California Democratic State convention.

I'm pretty removed from the inner workings at the state level, but my objective view is:

It's 'BUSINESS AS USUAL'. By that, I mean, DLC-style management, and focus.

Top down.

Pretty obvious, and pretty sad to this Independent who's registered as a Democratic Party member so she can at least vote in the general election.

So many good people are there volunteering their time, and treated like a bunch of cattle to be corraled and moved around with no real plan other than to have the bodies waiting if needed.

A waste of their valuable time and a real waste of a lot of good energy that needs a focus.

I understand the mindset - done a lot of large event planning myself. It's easy to get into the "Do this, because I told you to" mode - IF you are inexperienced and in a stressful environment.

And, those tensions are high.

This type of patronizing BUSINESS AS USUAL was a sad commentary as to the mindset of certain members of the 'STAFF' apparatus at this state level and not very welcoming to a potential future volunteer.

And who in the world wants to sit all day listening to speeches? I was surprised by the lack of caucus report-backs and discussions of issues that EVERYONE has concerns about.

But, shoot - those last-night parties were humdiggers, eh?

You know - priorities.

[Seaofdreams]

Strong arm tactics what a joke they talk about the Clinton's like their mob bosses.Political propaganda to sway Americans avoiding reporting the news like real news reporters with their pom poms out slobbering over Obama.When Obama's background fully comes out Americans will regret they even voted for him. http://www.obamatruth.org/
If you follow polls there far from fact,you'll see in the up coming states Hillary will do better than projected.If you listen to the news with the so called expert round table opinions equals to 4 more years of Bush as McCain will be your next president.First take Hillary out then Obama and better than a David Copperfield trick a republican appears welcome to meet the new boss same as the old boss. Loss of jobs,tax cuts for the rich a soaring cost of living no thanks !! Hillary is the smart choice plain and simple!!!

[Gma11]

Read the transcript to understand the Clinton strong-arm tactics in their campaign against Dole (the 90-minute PBS Frontline investigation, "Washington's Other Scandal," covers shenanigans of both campaigns). Especially pay attention to their treatment of the Cheyenne-Arapaho tribes of Oklahoma (toward the end the the transcript).

The video is better, because it provides the body language, but it is no longer available. Get hold of it if you can. My university uses it for social problems classes, to illustrate fundamental problems in the financing of our elections. I originally supported Hillary (I'm an Independent), giving her the benefit of the doubt. But when she hired Ickes after Super Tuesday, I could no longer support her. He is, in my opinion, the Democratic Party's Rove.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/scandal/etc/script.html

[goodsnservices]

We've long heard about Hillary's strong arm tactics. This letter is only surprising in that it is clear evidence of one of the methods used. How many of those Superdelegates this letter is portraying as "independent minded" are too afraid of Clinton's retaliation to exercise that independence to endorse Obama?

It's time to pull the fangs, people. This crap is sickening.

[MaineMike]

I can't believe that those twenty Clinton supporters put that in writing! What a joke!

This is just another demonstration of their boundless arrogance and contempt for the American people.

[jasket]

Big deal. The money they give isn't as important when Barrack can raise 50 million in a month with nckel and dimes from people like me. I say give them their money back on the condition that Hillary drops out. Us million who have given Obama $25 here and ther will do it agin.

[BosnianSniper]

Yep! i'll take $50 million a month over $78,850 a month anytime.

[standforpeace]

I don't think that you're being fair to the Clintons and their financial supporters. If you were a big money roller and had gotten used to the business as usual approach of trading your cash for poltical influence and a candidate came along who rose to the top of the heap by circumventing you and taking the alternate route of mobilizing almost 2 million small donors, wouldn't you fight back using threats, bribes, and any other means at your disposal? And if you were a candidate who had been virtually guaranteed victory before the primary/caucus season even began by your big money friends and the Super Delegate party hacks who jumped on your bandwagon wouldn't you attack the upstart who was claiming what was rightfully yours like a rabid dog with no concern for anything but making sure he didn't get away with it? Is it really unfair of Hillary and her money players to use every dirty, party-destroying tactic they can as they fight to stop from being buried in history's graveyard of irrelevant hasbeens? Afterall, these donors bought and paid for Hillary's nomination; aren't they entitled to what they paid for? I mean, isn't that only fair?

[mommadona]

Well, when you put it THAT way........

Good DLC perspective.

[standforpeace]

Well I'm glad it's all out in the open. I guess this is what they call the new math. If you can't win the pledged delegates, say that it's about the popular vote. If you can't win the popular vote, say that is about who is ahead in national polls. If you fall behind in national polls, say it's about the Electoral College (wtf was that about). And if none of that's working, just go all old school on their asses and resort to extortion. I believe that the financial blackmail that we are seeing now is the desperate last move of a dying snake, and we just need to stay strong until the snake gives up the ghost.

Is there anyone out still arguing with a straight face that the Super Delegates are a valuable part of the nomination process? From where I sit, it is apparent that they are a small group of elites that are entirely too open to manipulation rather than a group of honest brokers making an independent decision. Fortunately, the two-part solution is simple. Democratic voters need to make some noise and make it plain to the Super Delegates that we want the candidate who wins the most delegates in the primary/caucus process to be our nominee and we won't support the party come November if party hacks override our choice. Second, we make it clear that after the 2008 nominating contest, we want the Super Delegates to take a permanent vacation.

[BJMS]

WOW - $24 million over ten years??? We Obama donors (approaching 2 million strong) could raise that in a week and a half!!! They're just annoyed that they've become SO irrelevant!!!

[jules7212]

Ah Lucy, I've been wondering about that since the beginning and to tell you the truth, I have more fear now that i ever did before.

Look how the race started for her - a 30 point lead, 20 point lead then Iowa - a 3rd place showing. Then she gave her campaign 5 million? Makes you wonder doesn't it. No way to loose right?

I think Barack deserves more credit than some will ever give him. He's beat power, money, name brand, dishonesty and more. I hope he has made a HUGH dent and I mean HUGH dent in the despictable underhanded ways to win an election.

I do believe it has been the only reason SD's haven't come out - fear. After all, Bill Richardson started a new grass roots movement (lol). I think the doors are open and hopefully others will follow. Now that's a change they can believe in.

[hopefulintexas]

just when i think i can't be horrified by anything else they do, the clintons resort to full-blown thuggery. honestly, i'm glad that she's been so desperate she's exposed herself and her tactics. i believe that her poll numbers are going down because the treachery and corrpution in her methodology is now -- well, quite "transparent" -- to use her word.

on a brighter note, i just watched a michelle obama speech on UTUBE that was very heartening. it was a speech she gave in delaware; i recommend it highly. she talks about how this is the same kind of thing they faced fighting the chicago/illinois "machine" politics when he ran for state legislature. it's very encouraging to know that not only did they expect this, they've actually been through this before. she virtually outlines the things they expected to happen -- back in January -- all of which have come true.

she even says, "Barack will be the underdog in this race until he (accepts the nomination) or (is sworn in as President) (i can't remember) -- and that they expected that. she talks about how "power" fights "change" with a vengeance.

[lincat]

That's what I'm always wondering. What are they up to; what are they going to do next.

[goodsnservices]

After the convention declares Obama the nominee after the first vote, they will file a lawsuit to declare the nominating process unconstitutional. Then they will demand that the whole process be thrown out and Hillary declared the winner based on the electoral votes of the states she won multiplied by the number of years of experience she has had multiplied by the number of overseas trips she took during the Clinton administration. Then on the day of the inaugural, they'll break into the White House, confiscate all the china, silverware, drapes and rugs, break a few lamps, defecate in the Lincoln bedroom, and leave "Hillary won the election, fool!" graffiti on the walls. Hillary will snap pictures to prove that she "occupied" the White House in 2009.

[eridees]

If SNL wasn't in the bag for her this would make a great skit!

[altohone]

Alas, the real reason Hillary started the race with 156 Superdelegates allowing the media to report her "lead" since Iowa has been exposed.

The 156 knew exactly what was in store for them if they wouldn't come aboard.

It would be interesting to see how Lewis and the few who have switched to Obama are faring in the fundraising from Hillary's insiders.

[loper2008]

Apparently, people in New Hampshire our mad that the Clintons are now criticizing them for moving up their election. Here is an editorial from their newspaper:

http://www.theunionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Fair-weather+friends%3a+The+Clintons+cut+NH+loose&articleId=a061c399-bee3-4a1f-8c4f-86d8d7ae6a15

[goodsnservices]

Their long history of turning on people they no longer need is well established. The only surprise here is that New Hampshire is surprised that they did the same thing to them. That's what happens when you come into the orb of narcicists. You exist for and at their pleasure, and if your demise under the bus serves their purpose, well, that's just the natural order of the universe. It isn't really lying, you know. Even reality itself bends to their will.

[tubette]

at this rate, there's no telling what we'll be talking about in June if she's still in the race.....

[OtayPanky]

What a dumb-ass move by these big money donors. That crap plays well for monied repubs - but is death for the dem plebes.

Strong Arming 101: If you're gonna shake down the townspeople, you do it quietly.

And then there's the Bosnia deal - which just reminds us all of you- know-who.

Now Britney's getting clubbed in the polls like a baby seal.

LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!!!

[PingMama]

Us Obama supporters can raise $15MM in 15 days.

Don't worry DNC! We got your back.

[Sylmason]

AMEN,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[LBKN]

... and I haven't even started yet...LOL.... been waiting for a true emergency.

[ndolomar]

These types of "strongarm" -- sorry, it's the only word I could think of to describe them -- tactics are what propel some of us to think perhaps the Clinton camp approached Canadian officials about the "superficiality" of the anti-NAFTA remarks on the campaign trail. Add to it the Quixotic recount of Sen. Clinton's Bosnia adventure, and the series of incidents begins to build doubt in just how reliable an administration she would lead. What would we be asked to believe, and what would be later be told was a "misstatement"? When it's padding your resume so you can work at Hewlett Packard, it's one thing. If it's negotiating military action and trade deals with strong foreign governments, well, there's not a lot of room for "suspension of disbelief."